Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert Strong

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Delete yandman 08:13, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Robert Strong

Robert Strong (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Non-notable magician. The article claims he was in the film version of Rent but the magician's own website and IMDB fail to back this claim up. He is a performer and while he may be good at what he does, he hasn't attained any level of notability which would deserve an encyclopedia article. IrishGuy ^talk 22:05, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

• Delete unless sources can be found to verify the claims of importance. Article mentions a story on "insidebayarea.com" but the link doesn't appear to work. (Note: I removed the CSD tag, but that was because it asserted importance and the claims needed more investigation to determine if they were true) --W.marsh 22:57, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
• Weak keep Some sources have been located, and the article re-written. I don't think it makes a really strong case of notability yet, but there's enough there for me to say keep, so that the article can continue to grow. --Elonka 03:51, 9 February 2007 (UTC)Weak delete based on lack of references. He's got a great website which implies that there are reliable sources out there, such as reviews in the Baltimore Sun and Washington Post, but there's not enough detail to actually verify anything. I haven't been able to locate anything solid on Google searches either -- everything I come up with is promotional in nature. If someone can find any reliable sources to verify sufficient notability though, I'd be willing to switch my opinion to keep. --Elonka 00:08, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
  • The stuff I'm seeing in the WP at least doesn't seem to constitute non-trivial coverage. e.g. "Check out [Robert Strong]'s breathtaking act -- maybe even be part of it -- at one of nine "Hogwash" shows this month at the Smithsonian's Discovery Theater: July 23 at noon, and at 10 and 11:30 a.m. each day from July 26 through July 29" and that appears to be all. That's not really the kind of information we'd use to write an encyclopedia article. Their search doesn't actually allow you to view full articles though [1]. --W.marsh 15:14, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
    • True, but it does confirm the Smithsonian performance. So in my mind, that's notability on the East Coast, combined with notability on the West Coast as well with the "Best of the Bay" award. I agree that it's not a super strong case for notability yet, but let's also keep in mind that the article was just created on February 6, and then got sent to AfD within 48 hours. I say let's keep for now, give the article some time to breathe, and then if it still looks weak after it's been given a chance to expand, we can take another look at it later. --Elonka 17:04, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
• Weak delete based on all the reasons listed already. Mermaid from the Baltic Sea 00:51, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep I disclose that I'm a friend of Robert's, but my argument for recommending a keep is that I have read all the articles written (Washington Post, City Times, Gold River News) and seen the Inside Bay Area (both online and in print). I'm looking for the Inside Bay Area link in the Internet Archive.--Dattner 05:59, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.